Hopes on female armors design

[JFSOCC]

Satisfy both camps, like CD Projekt.

 

there are no camps. Most people by far have given their voice for realistic armour. Some of us believe that gender-specific armour is not unrealistic, because it existed in  the real world there is no reason to assume it wouldn't in games.

 

That doesn't mean that I want to see bikini armour, no-one is arguing that.

[Karkarov]

 

This is good and what a clear majority of the backers wanted it seems like if you look at that massive huge old thread.

 

 

By "clear majority of the backers" you mean the less than 1% of backers who commented/voted, right?  As Tony Montana once said; "don't get high on your own supply".

 

Also, I totally support golden bejeweled codpieces. Hell, Im wearing one right now.

 

Well when that vocal 1% is almost 100% behind "realistic" then yeah, I think it is fair to say that's probably what most want.  There is also the fact that obsidian has already said that's what they are doing.

 

*looks at your codpiece*

 

Compensating for something ?

[Monte Carlo]

All depends on what your definition of "spiritual successor" is.

 

Something that credibly captures the spirit of what went before. Which this doesn't. That doesn't mean it's going to be bad... but it does mean that Obz were being a bit lawyerly with their pitch.

[Gfted1]

Well when that vocal 1% is almost 100% behind "realistic" then yeah, I think it is fair to say that's probably what most want.

 

 

There is also the fact that obsidian has already said that's what they are doing.

Obsidian released the original artwork with boobplate, thus indicating their preference, then backpedaled when 20-30 people made noise.

 

*looks at your codpiece*

 

Compensating for something ?

I live in a dangerous town and must take steps to ensure my groin doesn't get savaged. Also, fashion. Im considering getting another one with a face on it, as shown here.

 

[Agremont]

 

 

 

I live in a dangerous town and must take steps to ensure my groin doesn't get savaged. Also, fashion. Im considering getting another one with a face on it, as shown here.

 

 

 

What the.... Now that's just creepy.

Edited February 4, 2014 by Agremont

[PrimeJunta]

Which this doesn't.

Does too!

[Amentep]

 

All depends on what your definition of "spiritual successor" is.

 

Something that credibly captures the spirit of what went before. Which this doesn't. That doesn't mean it's going to be bad... but it does mean that Obz were being a bit lawyerly with their pitch.

 

Really depends on your what you're looking for.

 

Any game that met the keywords of "High Fantasy", "Isometric", "party based", "role playing game", "real time with pause" could argue that it was a spiritual successor of the IE games and not be incorrect (which is pretty much where I stopped with my expectations, too).

[Monte Carlo]

^ 'Tep you are too easily pleased. Which is cute, actually.

[Monte Carlo]

 

Which this doesn't.

Does too!

 

 

Doesn't!!!!

[PrimeJunta]

Doesn't!!!!

4 would not bang

[Agremont]

Is it the lack of D&D rules, Monte?

[Hiro Protagonist II]

If there's going to be codpieces in PoE, then I'd like to see some attributes imbued on them like +10 Charisma and open up additional dialogue options.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I think there should be a golden platemail codpiece. It devastates foes with bolts of pure sexy.

[Monte Carlo]

Is it the lack of D&D rules, Monte?

 

 

I am a Grog but I don't think D&D is optimal for computer games. I understand making a bespoke system.

 

What grates is the too-clever-by-half design (sorry, Sawyer). Doing away with hit points and healing and swapping it for stamina and wounds. I don't get it, I don't understand it and, dammit, I don't like it. It's answering a question nobody really asked.

 

Nor do I like quest XP, 4th Edition D&D and classes that fit MMO tropes.

 

Sorry, just the way I roll on these things. Lots about P:E is cool and a lot of it doesn't fit what I imagined I was backing. Having said that, I don't regret backing it, wish it epic success and hope I enjoy it.

 

But, when's all said and done it's (for me) like someone put a woolly hipster hat on the Mona Lisa.

 

 

Edit: I want a game I can slip into like the old chair Frasier's pa used to have. Not like a piece of intriguingly designed Bauhaus furniture.

Edited February 4, 2014 by Monte Carlo

[Amentep]

^ 'Tep you are too easily pleased. Which is cute, actually.

Perhaps. Honestly though I'd much rather like/dislike PE for what it is than for what I thought it should/could have been.

 

Too much expectation will raise the bar so high nothing can ever live up to it.

[Sarex]

Perhaps. Honestly though I'd much rather like/dislike PE for what it is than for what I thought it should/could have been.

 

Too much expectation will raise the bar so high nothing can ever live up to it.

 

No one said we won't like it, but it isn't what was "promised".

[tajerio]

 

All depends on what your definition of "spiritual successor" is.

 

Something that credibly captures the spirit of what went before. Which this doesn't. That doesn't mean it's going to be bad... but it does mean that Obz were being a bit lawyerly with their pitch.

 

 

Then it depends on what your definition of the "spirit of the IE games" is.  It was pretty clear from the early days that Obsidian were going with a broad definition of that spirit--a fantasy isometric party-based combat-heavy RPG with lots of reactivity and lots of text.  It's also been obvious from the beginning of the campaign that a number of the backers have had a more specific idea of what that spirit entails.  Neither of those views is objectively right or wrong, however.  

[Monte Carlo]

^ Exactly. Nobody is throwing teddy bears out of prams here, I hope.

[Lephys]

I think it's pretty simple:

 

Skimpy armor is ludicrous. Skimpy clothing/garb, totally fine.

 

Basically, it's either armor or it isn't. If it isn't physically protecting anything, don't even pretend it's armor. Even if it's MAGICAL "armor," it's still not using its metal composition and body coverage to offer any protection, so there's no point in it.

 

So, if the game just has some female NPC who wants to wear scant attire (even if it's adorned with metal, even... totes her choice), that's fine. But the game doesn't need to pretend that's her armor. If she's claiming its armor, or saying "this is what all the Warriors of Boobonia wear, for protection!" or something, that's where I call shenanigans. Same for a dude. If Conan the Barbarian wants to run around in a codpiece, then awesome. But it isn't armor. It's a codpiece that he happens to be wearing.

 

The other thing is, regarding the whole "it's sexist!" aspect of this is, it's not really sexist unless it's arbitrarily designed so that all women are just sexual objects. Something doesn't have to be sexist to portray women who willingly flaunt their physiological aesthetic design, and/or wear whatever they want for whatever reason they choose, which females do in real life, even though no development team has designed them to do so and/or no one's objectifying them -- purely of their own free will.

 

Anywho... u_u

Edited February 4, 2014 by Lephys

[Agremont]

You could probably make a case for sexism looking at the prevalence of certain female character designs in video games (RPG specificaly) and how it generaly differs from male character design.

Edited February 4, 2014 by Agremont

[FlintlockJazz]

Satisfy both camps, like CD Projekt.

 

She ain't no virgin!  No virgin would dress like that!  I call shenanigans and accuse the dwarves, we all know she likes it short and round!

Edited February 4, 2014 by FlintlockJazz

[Amentep]

 

Perhaps. Honestly though I'd much rather like/dislike PE for what it is than for what I thought it should/could have been.

 

Too much expectation will raise the bar so high nothing can ever live up to it.

 

No one said we won't like it, but it isn't what was "promised".

 

Wasn't it Kresselack who said "Promised? Promised? I made you no promise...". :D

 

If the game is an isometric, real-time with pause party based fantasy role playing system and those things all make it "a successor to the IE games" you are getting what they "promised", even if its not what you actually wanted or thought you'd get. IMO.

 

Mind you the game will always have two evaluated axises; "is it good" and "is it a good follow-up to BG/PST/IWD (or all three or any combination of the three)". But that's different from the "bait and switch" feeling I've gotten from the arguments so far. YMMV.

Edited February 4, 2014 by Amentep

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Going from the trailer, screen shots and a lot of the classes, it does seem like an IE game. But the test for me is playing it and finding out if it's has the (taken from the KS site) memorable companions and the epic exploration of Baldur’s Gate, add in the fun, intense combat and dungeon diving of Icewind Dale, and tie it all together with the emotional writing and mature thematic exploration of Planescape: Torment. The bar has already been set high.

 

I'm keeping my expectations down for now, mostly due to Obsidian already polled for new wilderness areas which concerns me about the epic exploration of Baldur’s Gate. I'm really hoping it's not going to end up similar to IWD where you're railroaded into areas and not being able to go back like you can in Baldur's Gate. I'm playing through BG2 at the moment and did the absolute bare minimum quests to get to spell hold. It's interesting going back to do the quests that were in Chapter 2 / 3 and the remarks by some of the quests givers saying stuff like, 'collect the fee and you'll be able to find Imoen' even though she's in my party. But it's also good that I can go back and do these quests.

 

Also, on armour. I noticed Melisan's armour isn't as revealing as Irenicus, especially with Irenicus' nipples and codpiece.

 

Edited February 4, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[J.E. Sawyer]

Doing away with hit points and healing and swapping it for stamina and wounds. I don't get it, I don't understand it and, dammit, I don't like it. It's answering a question nobody really asked.

 

The question is, "How do we pace out a series of fights without requiring a cleric to be in the party and for that cleric to prepare cure x spells every day -- or the binge consumption of a lot of healing items?"  As someone who played a ton of 2nd Ed. AD&D clerics, this was a very real question.  It's a question that the 3E, 3.5, and Pathfinder designers asked and tried to answer with spontaneous conversion and channel energy.  Hit points are the universal constant that tethers the limits of a party.  Some classes rely on daily spells, some classes can hack and slash all day long, but when the HP run low, the party needs to stop.  And in those pre-3.X games, one bad fight could mean an immediate about-face (assuming you had the option) depending on who was in the party and what they had prepped.

 

3.X improved things over 2nd Ed. because, while it did still require a healer of some sort to be present, more classes gained access to healing and the good/neutral clerics could spontaneously convert.  Evil clerics were still out of luck, as were druids if they were in the unfortunate position of being the "party healer".  And if you relied on a bard or paladin... yikes.  Pathfinder switched turn undead uses straight over to what 3.X had creeped them into anyway -- raw charges of power, though now reworked as something that healed and damaged undead in the same action.  Again, this helped, but good/neutral clerics still had a firm grip on the longevity of a party.  A variety of classes could deal damage, hold a line, or produce a dizzying array of magical effects, but when it came to consistent, reliable healing, good/neutral clerics were far and away "the guys" that needed to be in the party.  Even 3E rogues don't really "need" to be in a party.  If you set off for adventure without a good/neutral cleric, you're either investing a lot of money in healing items and UMD or you're heading down a rough road of druids and evil clerics as prepared healers/short adventures.

 

I know you don't like 4E, and there are plenty of things I don't like about it, but I do think healing surges were an improvement over where things headed with 3.X/Pathfinder.  It's clearly another answer to the same question, "How do we pace out a series of fights without requiring a cleric to be in the party and for that cleric to prepare cure x spells every day -- or the binge consumption of a lot of healing items?"  Stamina/health is a similar idea using a slightly different mechanic.  I understand that you don't like it, but to say that no one asked the question -- clearly D&D's designers have been asking and trying to answer this question for a while now.

[Karkarov]

In all fairness if it takes a rote copy paste of BG2 to be "in the spirit of IE games" I don't know why anyone feeling that would back Eternity.  The D&D license was never part of the deal so D&D rules were never going to be used.  Also different does not = worse.  To me it isn't even about real time with pause or isometric nonsense.  It is about the sense of place, the world building, the story, the party dynamic with unique characters, and the small adventuring party based strategy combat.  Frankly the IE games didn't even deliver all that well on the last one since I won almost all fights with the same 2-3 tactics every time.

 

Is this going to be game of the year?  Will Gamespot laugh at the Witcher 3 in it's rush to praise Eternity?  No, probably not.  Bear in mind that doesn't mean it won't be a good game that delivers on what the kickstarter promised.  When you guys see real evidence to suggest the game is a flop feel free to post, but all we have up to now is some unknown "journalist" making iffy not even that bad comments based on a alpha.